Skip to main content

T: 020 7353 8415

News

Charles Streeten, planning barrister at Francis Taylor Building
The High Court (Supperstone J) has handed down judgment in R (Spragge) v Westminster City Council [2018] EWHC 2058 (Admin).   The case establishes two important propositions:   Firstly, it establishes that where a claim for judicial review is withdrawn following the grant of permission, the defendant is entitled to recover all of its costs, including those incurred prior to the grant of...
Charles Streeten, planning barrister at Francis Taylor Building
High Court Rules Reasons Required When Discharging Conditions   In R (Newey) v South Hams DC [2018] EWHC [1827] Admin, the High Court (Garnham J) quashed a grant of planning permission and a decision to discharge conditions enabling the construction of development in Dartmouth.   The first ground on which the claim succeeded was that the Council failed to give reasons for the delegated decision...
Mark Westmoreland Smith, planning and environmental law barrister at Francis Taylor Building
Sunderland City Council and South Tyneside Council are promoting a 150ha International Advanced Manufacturing Park (IAMP) for automotive suppliers on land adjacent to the Nissan manufacturing plant in Sunderland. The Nissan plant produces over one third of the cars made in the UK. It is critical both to the region and the country. The Councils jointly produced and adopted an Area Action Plan (AAP...
Sarah Sackman, public, planning and environmental law barrister at Francis Taylor Building
HHJ Jarman QC today handed down an important judgement quashing the decision of Corby Clinical Commissioning Group to downgrade the urgent care walk-in centre in Corby. The Claimant, Lyn Buckingham, a local NHS healthcare campaigner, was successful on all of her grounds of Judicial Review. The Court held that the CCG had: failed to consult the public despite repeated promises that it would do so...
Mark Westmoreland Smith, planning and environmental law barrister at Francis Taylor Building
Maximus Networks Limited (Maximus) submitted a large number of applications for prior approval under Part 16, Class A permitted development rights to construct telephone kiosks across London. In all cases, Maximus had failed in its obligation to give notice of the applications to the owners of the land to which the proposals related. As a result a number of London Boroughs refused to validate the...
Mark Westmoreland Smith, planning and environmental law barrister at Francis Taylor Building
Ludgate House was a large commercial office building on the Thames by Blackfriars Bridge. It has now been demolished and is being redeveloped. Prior to demolition and whilst the plans for redevelopment were being finalised, the owners of the building employed a security services company to provide guardians. Guardians are short term licencees who would live in the building and were required to...
Melissa Murphy
In an ex tempore judgment given by Lady Justice Hallett DBE (Vice President of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division), the Court of Appeal has today refused to grant leave to the London Borough of Islington to bring an appeal against the decision of a judge of Blackfriars Crown Court which was a “terminatory ruling”, in a prosecution brought by them.   The Council sought to prosecute the owners...
Sarah Sackman, public, planning and environmental law barrister at Francis Taylor Building
The High Court will today hear a Judicial Review claim brought against the decision of Corby Clinical Commissioning Group to downgrade the urgent care walk-in centre in Corby and replace it with an appointment only primary care hub. The decision was taken on 30 January 2018 without public consultation despite repeated promises by the CCG that it would consult on its decision. Mr Justice Garnham...
Saira Kabir Sheikh QC, planning and environmental law barrister at Francis Taylor Building
In Chesterton v Wokingham BC [2018] EWHC 1795 (Admin), the High Court (Upper Tribunal Judge Martin Rodger QC) considered whether a local authority had properly exercised its discretion under section 70C of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to decline to determine an application if to do so might grant planning permission for the whole or any part of a matter identified as a breach of...
Annabel Graham Paul, planning and environmental law barrister at Francis Taylor Building
In Tate v Northumberland County Council [2018] EWCA Civ 1519 Lindblom and Jackson LJJ upheld the High Court’s quashing of planning permission for a house in the Green Belt on the grounds of inadequate reasoning. The Council had approved the house as an exception to Green Belt policy under NPPF paragraph 89 as “limited infilling within a village”. In 2008, an Inspector had, however, refused...

Pages